Engineering schools that won’t crush my child’s soul

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's supposed to be challenging

Of course it is. And these are students who have excelled in HS in: AP Physics C, AP Chem, AP Calc BC w/top grades. and tippy top math SAT.

Why TRY to weed them out?

This.

Soul-crushing is different from requiring diligence, hard work, and intelligence. People are not objecting to the latter 3.

I’m not convinced this is actually happening.

That's fine. Opinions on DCUM always vary. It also means this thread is not really intended for you.

OK, thread police.

I attended a rigorous engineering school myself and this just doesn't ring true. It seems like a narrative built on feelings over facts.

Another engineer here and I agree. So much drama with engineering here. I don't get it but whatever.

Because life is hard and we don't want it to be that hard for our kids.

Then they should choose a major that is not as hard and demanding as engineering. Why does this need to be spelled out for some of you?
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's supposed to be challenging

Of course it is. And these are students who have excelled in HS in: AP Physics C, AP Chem, AP Calc BC w/top grades. and tippy top math SAT.

Why TRY to weed them out?

This.

Soul-crushing is different from requiring diligence, hard work, and intelligence. People are not objecting to the latter 3.

I’m not convinced this is actually happening.

That's fine. Opinions on DCUM always vary. It also means this thread is not really intended for you.

OK, thread police.

I attended a rigorous engineering school myself and this just doesn't ring true. It seems like a narrative built on feelings over facts.

Another engineer here and I agree. So much drama with engineering here. I don't get it but whatever.

Because life is hard and we don't want it to be that hard for our kids.

Engineering is hard. It’s not for everyone. Don’t push your kid into a field that isn’t suitable for them.

Engineering programs ought not accept / admit students who can't do the work.

It is silly that 67% is a common graduation rate for engineering programs (per ABET stats online).

Why is it silly?

Very top engineering programs (MIT) have 90+% graduation rates. Some mid-tier engineering programs have 90+% graduation rates. The common factor is those programs only admit students who are capable of doing the work.

Why admit someone who can't succeed?

Why load them with student loan debt they can't repay?

Why set someone up to fail?

Why design any college program with a goal of failing out 33% of the students when by proper admissions filtering that isn't needed?

A “goal”?

GMAFB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's supposed to be challenging

Of course it is. And these are students who have excelled in HS in: AP Physics C, AP Chem, AP Calc BC w/top grades. and tippy top math SAT.

Why TRY to weed them out?

This.

Soul-crushing is different from requiring diligence, hard work, and intelligence. People are not objecting to the latter 3.

I’m not convinced this is actually happening.

That's fine. Opinions on DCUM always vary. It also means this thread is not really intended for you.

OK, thread police.

I attended a rigorous engineering school myself and this just doesn't ring true. It seems like a narrative built on feelings over facts.

Another engineer here and I agree. So much drama with engineering here. I don't get it but whatever.

Because life is hard and we don't want it to be that hard for our kids.

Then they should choose a major that is not as hard and demanding as engineering. Why does this need to be spelled out for some of you?
DP

Engineering is a separate admissions pool from Sciences or Arts & Letters at most universities.

If the student doesn't qualify for engineering then don't admit them to engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's supposed to be challenging

Of course it is. And these are students who have excelled in HS in: AP Physics C, AP Chem, AP Calc BC w/top grades. and tippy top math SAT.

Why TRY to weed them out?

This.

Soul-crushing is different from requiring diligence, hard work, and intelligence. People are not objecting to the latter 3.

I’m not convinced this is actually happening.

That's fine. Opinions on DCUM always vary. It also means this thread is not really intended for you.

OK, thread police. :lol:

I attended a rigorous engineering school myself and this just doesn't ring true. It seems like a narrative built on feelings over facts.

Another engineer here and I agree. So much drama with engineering here. I don't get it but whatever.

Because life is hard and we don't want it to be that hard for our kids.

Engineering is hard. It’s not for everyone. Don’t push your kid into a field that isn’t suitable for them.

Engineering programs ought not accept / admit students who can't do the work.

It is silly that 67% is a common graduation rate for engineering programs (per ABET stats online).

Why is it silly?

Very top engineering programs (MIT) have 90+% graduation rates. Some mid-tier engineering programs have 90+% graduation rates. The common factor is those programs only admit students who are capable of doing the work.

Why admit someone who can't succeed?

Why load them with student loan debt they can't repay?

Why set someone up to fail?

Why design any college program with a goal of failing out 33% of the students when by proper admissions filtering that isn't needed?

I don't think colleges design their engineering program and intentionally weed out 1/3. When I was in school, kids dropped out for various reasons - too much work, lost interest, can't keep up, found different interests...etc. I don't see anything wrong with that process.

[Anonymous]

I find it weird that some posters actually think their kids should be able to get good grades and succeed in a field for which they're clearly not cut out. I would never encourage my kids to pursue a degree in something in which they didn't have a strong bent/natural talent.

[Anonymous]

I mean I'm not worried in the slightest that my kid isn't cut out for engineering -- but she would find a program where many of her peers were struggling extremely demoralizing. She'd really hate that a lot.

She can't tolerate when material is "dumbed down," hates slowing her roll, and thrives in high-intensity academic environments: The more challenging it is, the clearer and more calm she is.

At the same time, she's highly attuned to peers, and is seeking programs that promote not only the success of individual students, but that are calibrated to promote interpersonal, collective success, as well.

She's definitely hoping that the programs that promise collaborative, team-driven, project-based curricula mean what they say, because she's been "succeeding academically" all on her own for a long, long time, and is so eager to finally join a cohort of students to learn with.

[Anonymous]

Engineers design bridges and structures. Engineers, like pilots, need to be competent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean I'm not worried in the slightest that my kid isn't cut out for engineering -- but she would find a program where many of her peers were struggling extremely demoralizing. She'd really hate that a lot.

She can't tolerate when material is "dumbed down," hates slowing her roll, and thrives in high-intensity academic environments: The more challenging it is, the clearer and more calm she is.

At the same time, she's highly attuned to peers, and is seeking programs that promote not only the success of individual students, but that are calibrated to promote interpersonal, collective success, as well.

She's definitely hoping that the programs that promise collaborative, team-driven, project-based curricula mean what they say, because she's been "succeeding academically" all on her own for a long, long time, and is so eager to finally join a cohort of students to learn with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Engineers design bridges and structures. Engineers, like pilots, need to be competent.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean I'm not worried in the slightest that my kid isn't cut out for engineering -- but she would find a program where many of her peers were struggling extremely demoralizing. She'd really hate that a lot.

She can't tolerate when material is "dumbed down," hates slowing her roll, and thrives in high-intensity academic environments: The more challenging it is, the clearer and more calm she is.

At the same time, she's highly attuned to peers, and is seeking programs that promote not only the success of individual students, but that are calibrated to promote interpersonal, collective success, as well.

She's definitely hoping that the programs that promise collaborative, team-driven, project-based curricula mean what they say, because she's been "succeeding academically" all on her own for a long, long time, and is so eager to finally join a cohort of students to learn with.

yeah really weird that some kids are engaged, interested, and super-smart -- and want both challenging programs and happy peers!

unhappy students ≠ higher standards! Lose the scarcity mindset

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD is at Colorado School of Mines. Could not be happier. She's involved in the nerdy engineering culture and the sporty snowboarding/hiking culture. It's such a supportive, collaborative environment. She's in a learning community so she has built in academic support on her floor. The school is small enough that she has upperclassman as friends and they provide practical guidance about the classes and how to survive. She's on a team preparing for the engineering competitions in April, is on the dive team, and is taking a leadership role in the jewish organization on campus. I could not have wished for a better fit for her. Some of her friends are a bit goofy but no more so than any late teen, early 20s kid. DS is on the spectrum so she knows what ND is. She is not and has found a great group of friends.

Sounds so fun!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do not consider Virginia Tech. As a parent, I had the rudest responses from them. I asked if it was possible -to just- plan for 5 years to complete the program. Plan from the beginning, plan to take a lighter load. Instead of explaining why not or just saying a simple no, they were insulting, berated what they thought were my DD's qualifications - based on nothing. They did not know, die not know her stellar qualifications.

Tbh, it is weird to ask about a lighter -oad 5yr plan from the beginning. The common assumption would be they are not qualified. Plenty of top-stat females in engineering go through top schools in 4 years with no problem, let alone a less rigorous school.

If that happened it was still rude. Don’t know why she asked maybe her DD was a single parent or working to support herself through school or some other competing commitment. All they needed to do was answer the d@mn question and provide resources not snarky comments. 100% bet it wasn’t an engineer who made that snarky comment to her but some low quality degree field admin staffer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do not consider Virginia Tech. As a parent, I had the rudest responses from them. I asked if it was possible -to just- plan for 5 years to complete the program. Plan from the beginning, plan to take a lighter load. Instead of explaining why not or just saying a simple no, they were insulting, berated what they thought were my DD's qualifications - based on nothing. They did not know, die not know her stellar qualifications.

Tbh, it is weird to ask about a lighter -oad 5yr plan from the beginning. The common assumption would be they are not qualified. Plenty of top-stat females in engineering go through top schools in 4 years with no problem, let alone a less rigorous school.

If that happened it was still rude. Don’t know why she asked maybe her DD was a single parent or working to support herself through school or some other competing commitment. All they needed to do was answer the d@mn question and provide resources not snarky comments. 100% bet it wasn’t an engineer who made that snarky comment to her but some low quality degree field admin staffer

Yup. Relatedly, folks here often forget that graduation rates almost always track closely with student finances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Several threads discuss engineering schools that are hard to just survive. Some hint that there are alternatives

Could you list these alternatives?

Short background: my HS sophomore has great grades and tests well at a difficult school and has a general interest in engineering. But I don’t want him to drift into a situation where his soul could be crushed without choosing that.

Are there schools we could choose with engineering majors where you just learn how to do it without the excessive pressure and stress?

Those who crush the soul would be more worthwhile than those who doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC is working hard at, yet enjoying, their engineering program at Lehigh. School retention rate is quite high.

Same exact thing with my daughter - working hard in the Lehigh engineering program but she is happy with her choice. I have no insight into the retention rate but her pals all seem to be sticking with it.